Range of Mindfulness

[ediplomacy_admin]

This is an email we got from Patrick, Rwanda:

There is something that I think somehow
constitute food for thought on how to apply mindfulness in different
circumstances including the most extreme ones.

In fact; Eric and I were talking and chatting on different things and
it naturally moved to mindfulness as we are still amazed by that
notion and how relevant and supportive it can be in our lives and most
importantly how it can be introduced to as many people as possible to
make the world a better place.

Then somewhere along the conversation; Eric mentioned something that I
found quit challenging and mind-boggling. We were looking at the
benefits of being mindful even in the most difficult scenarios (
because that is actually when the choice of the response is crucial
and can alter the course of a lifetime) Then he mentioned a scenario
that would hardly if not impossibly; leave room for a mindful behavior
or response.

The example was as follows: Let’s say in a wartime scenario where
people are being killed; women raped and kids’ lives are being so
horribly wasted. It looks like the only person who could have access
to a mindful option is the perpetrator because he is the one
committing the crime and can choose not to. But it seems scary to
realize that the victim has no right whatsoever in that particular
moment including the right to be mindful. Except of course wishing for
a quicker and less painful death; which in most cases proves to be a
rarity ( like during the genocide people would beg to pay for a bullet
instead of being hacked to death. Of course the perpetrators would
take the money and still kill them horribly)

So the question that Eric came up with; if I try to summarize it is:
can mindfulness be applied in all circumstances or there are instances
where it is simply denied application?

To that; I must admit I was overwhelmed by the gravity of the question
because so far I have been able to understand the position of
mindfulness in post traumatic; and post conflict environment where it
can be one of the most important tool in dealing with the consequences
and managing related heavy emotions. But it hasn’t come to me to think
of its position during the exact moment of the crime and especially on
the side of the victim.

However as we carefully analysed this issue; it actually crossed my
mind at that point; that if humanity could reach a level of
understating that mindfulness is the way to live; then we wouldn’t
have these horrible scenarios in the first place. This makes the work
of B4E even more relevant to the evolution and survival of humankind.

The other thing that came to my mind is that mindfulness awareness
approach is not rigidly prescriptive or that it pretends to be a
ready-made solution to all the situations. Because when you look at
its values and the language it uses; you can tell that mindfulness is
presented as an option among others; to be used when possible as it
can ensure the best outcomes for all the party involved.

So dear all; this is just an attempt to sharing ideas and insight and
any comment on this is welcome and I am not even sure whether I have
presented as it was during my conversation with Eric ( but Eric; feel
free to elaborate on any point)

The point in going over situations like this; is as Eric said at a
certain point of our conversation; to broaden our understanding of
mindfulness from different angles so that if lets say similarly
challenging questions are brought up during a mindfulness circles or
workshop; we would have seen it coming. Of course we can’t cover
everything and we do not want to make it look like there is a need for
mindfulness to answer all the questions in the world.

Have a great day

[ediplomacy_admin]

Dear Patrick,
Your analysis of Mindfulness as relates to crisis or war situations reminds me of the terrible experiences of the recent events in Jos, Nigeria. You made very important observations and I agree with you completely that "if humanity could reach a level of
understating that mindfulness is the way to live; then we wouldn’t have these horrible scenarios in the first place".
Thank you so much my dear friend
Response from Emmanuel

[ediplomacy_admin]

Dear Patrick,

This conversation you have had with Eric reminded me of something that I witnessed during the genocide.
In the morning of 20th June 1994, the Interahamwe ( These are the militias that carried out the killings during the Genocide) made a raid in the Saint Paul Church where we had sought asylum with hundreds of other Tutsi. They entered the classrooms that sheltered us and started to point a finger to each young man to be killed. We were just sitting down staring at their expressionless faces. One by one, the chosen young men aged between 20 and 30 started to desperately move out . So, came the turn of a young man whose courage astonished me. He stood up vigorously, turned back to all of us and told us with a clear voice “ Forgive my killers because they don’t know what they do” . He then joined outside a total group of 64 young men chosen to die. Few minutes later we heard muffled gun shots. The interahamwe left, we pulled out of the classrooms with anguish to bury the bodies, still waiting our turn to come another day.
What I want to tell you guys is that young man had come a long way to arrive at Saint Paul Church, running away from a hiding place to an another . Crossing the killing roadblocks, crawling to escape bombs and bullets. But that day his chances to survive shrank and disappeared, he then surrendered and accepted the death. To my point of view that guy acted mindfully in a very crucial moment.
So, my hunch is that the B4E work and mindfulness teaching are in no case prescriptive with a dosage and a posology. They simply provide a prospect or a sign post to our inner capabilities and resources to navigate skillfully through the lifetime. This will defer from a person to an another, from simple to complex and difficult scenarios like Genocide.

Thank you my brother and let’s carry on this conversation,
Response from Emery Rutagonya

[omristern]

I'm thankful to take part in this most prudent conversation. Thanks too for the stories that you share, both Patrick and Emery. I can only imagine the hardships endured with recollection.

What resonated with me was the story of the brave young hero who stood up to speak at the moment before his death. I think that this mans bravery serves as a ubiquitous example of true heroism. This young man stood up against the "Power of Anonymity" - a concept coined by social psychologist Philip Zimbardo. Zimbardo postulates that humans do not have to be deranged, indoctrinated, nor drug induced to do something evil. No, in fact, humans can descend the slippery slope to atrocious acts such as genocide and torture merely by succumbing to the power of anonymity, in which case indifference and mindlessness wrest control of mindfulness. This is what the young man was proclaiming.

In the summer of 1971, Philip Zimbardo conducted a experiment with Stanford University students in Palo Alto, California, to explore this hypothesis. To be clear, he suggested that science should not focus on diagnosing "evil people" per say, but rather analyze the situations, cultures, and institutions which can make people do evil things. The Stanford Prison Experiment brought a group of 24 university students together and randomly assigned them into two groups - one half became prisoners and the other half became prisons guards. They were, of course told, that this was an experiment although and that they would simulate a prisoners situation, in which they were put in a fake prison in the basement of the Stanford Psychology building. They were told to act their part as prisoners and guards.

What transpired was both shocking and scientifically revealing. These students, who otherwise lead normal, congenial lives, adopted their roles completely. The so called "Prison Guards" actually began to punish, humiliate and sexually taunt the so called "Prisoners." The results became so severe that the experiment was canceled after only six days. Philip Zimbardo concluded that humans are capable of overhauling their usual customs when their acts become anonymous and are attributable to a higher anonymous institution, a greater cause, or a derived culture. Hence the Stanford Prison experiment, which although fake, lead these young students to believe that their acts were excusable because it was an anonymous entity (the experiment) that justified the actions. He draws parallels in Nazi Germany, and suggests that the modern day Abu Ghraib US Army prison scandal is one in the same.

Hanah Arendt, the infamous author that analyzed the Eichmann Trial, theorized on a similar concept that she called "The Banality of Evil," which causes humans to comply and aid with acts such as genocide, driven by the power of anonymity. Intelligently, in Zimbardo's latest TED talk, he suggests that while evil doers stem from otherwise "normal" individuals, the same is true for modern heros. In fact, he says that the true heros are everyday people who spontaneously and bravely challenge the power of anonymity. In effect, the "Banality of Evil becomes the Banality of Heroism." Evil doers emanate from the same situations that heros do - they are ordinary people who decide not to accept predisposed norms, settings, institutions, behaviors, etc. The brave young leader in the Church that Emery spoke of, he evokes not only heroism, but the tragic stalemate and indifference that can drive humans to do acts in the name of anonymity.

“Forgive my killers because they don’t know what they do” - a fallen Hero.

Patrick brings up an important point - who has the right to mindfulness? To derive an insight of Zimbardo's logic, the question should address not only WHO, but also WHAT situation, environment, culture, etc. has the right for mindfulness? Zimbardo suggests that we need a paradigm shift from the medical model that focuses only on the individual, to one that focuses on public health. In my opinion, these two things are not mutually exclusive, because it is the aggregate of individual acts of mindfulness that create institutions, cultures and situations that are conducive to conflict resolution.

Finally, Zimbardo says that everyday normal heros should be the true role models! They should be the ones populating billboards, television ads, storylines and popular media, rather than fabricated protagonists like Avatar's Jake Sully. You can take it one step further and say that mindfulness, an everyday and omnipresent challenge, is a heroic act, just like the young man in Emery's story. Mindfulness is heroic, because it stands up to norms, customs, cultures, institutions that may be flawed albeit accepted. It is to act when others are passive, to be mindful when others are mindless.

Philip Zimbardo's TED talk - http://www.ted.com/talks/philip_zimbard ... _evil.html